Friday, September 15, 2006

Hitting The Road With A Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution

I left Eureka at 2pm on Wednesday, headed to Santa Rosa. It took almost four hours to get to the Round Table Pizza where the Progressive Democrats of Sonoma County were holding their regular meeting in a private room. Many thanks to Anna Givens who was kind enough to invite me as the keynote speaker. The best thing about this group is that I didn't encounter one person who didn't get it. Nobody raised concerns or challenged statements like "there is no basis for confidence in reported election results," or "as long as people are jailed without charges and we are not presumed innocent, we are not Free People." This made my job easier. This may have been the most in depth and lengthiest talk I've given focused almost entirely on A Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution (.pdf).

Several years ago, when I first became politically active, my main focus was on evaluating how we choose our goals. That hasn't really changed, though I've developed various concepts and phrases that now provide guidance for making better choices. I began my presentation Wednesday night by saying I have a top line and a bottom line. The top line is that we need to look at how we choose our goals and if we do this using the concepts I'm about to share then the bottom line is that Peaceful revolution is necessary, NOW!

Among the concepts discussed, I suggested that wisely chosen goals, when achieved, should accomplish the following: create an immediate tangible impact or change; create a ripple effect with repercussions on the long-term big picture; and influence the balance of power between We The People and the government.

We talked about the two components of ruthless honesty: reconciling what we say we believe with how we act on that same information; and differentiating false alternatives from genuine alternatives.

The Voter Confidence Resolution was a good way to tie this all together. It is a ruthlessly honest document that says current election conditions ensure inconclusive outcomes, provide no basis for confidence in the results reported, and assume rather than seek the Consent of the Governed. What would be better is to implement the platform of election reforms contained in the resolution. While that won't happen all at once, the least we can do is reject the charade. That step builds toward the bigger goal of hand counting the ballots to reach a verifiable outcome we can accept. And that goes toward the even bigger goal of preventing power and authority from being bestowed upon a candidate claiming an office that was not properly won or even contested. Put another way, this is part of how we are withdrawing the Consent of the Governed.

It was a very lively discussion with a lot of Q&A. The topics I initiated took about 30 minutes while the dialog ran another entire hour. The questions led to answers that introduced many other Blueprint (.pdf) topics I hadn't yet brought up. We dealt with inherent uncertainty, the Cold Civil War, intentional divisiveness, the rift in the perception of reality, municipal civil disobedience, and more. If these terms are new for you, please read the Blueprint.

As usual, even when a gig like this seems to go well, my "what would be better?" instinct presents ideas for improvement. In the near future I hope to create some PowerPoint slides that will help streamline my presentation, also bringing it more consistency. I might even narrate some really brief comments that could be recorded and posted with the slides online. In addition, I recently compiled the last 2.5 years worth of local news coverage of election issues into a scrap book. I may try to create a virtual version. Already in progress, Voter Confidence Committee member Ruth Hoke is doing a comparative analysis of the coverage documented in the scrap book. We are aiming to have a serious critique ready in advance of next Thursday's media accountability forum ("Media Talkback").

So it took me about 3.5 hours to drive back to Eureka after my few hours in Santa Rosa. I had hoped to line up Bay Area appearances on the same trip and spend a few days down there but it didn't come together. Meanwhile, when I returned, I realized the ultimate motivation for being willing to make this trip anyway. Along with "Peaceful revolution is necessary, NOW!" I have a message for people in every town I can visit: "psst...the peaceful revolution is on...pass it on." There is just no way that people are not ready for it. They just don't know how to begin or that others have already begun.

We Do Not Consent, Volume 1 (left) and Volume 2 (right), feature essays from Dave Berman's previous
blogs, GuvWurld and We
Do Not Consent, respectively. Click the covers for FREE e-book versions (.pdf). As of April 2010, paperbacks are temporarily
out of print. Click here for the author's bio.

Back Page Quotes

"Give a damn about the world you live in? Give a damn about what you and I both know
is one of the most shameful and destructive periods in American history? If so, do something
about it. You can start by reading We Do Not Consent."

"If in the future we have vital elections, the "no basis for confidence" formulation that
GuvWurld is popularizing will have been a historically important development. This
is true because by implicitly insisting on verification and checks and balances instead
of faith or trust in elections officials or machines as a basis for legitimacy, it encourages
healthy transparent elections. It’s also rare that a political formulation approaches scientific
certainty, but this formulation is backed up by scientific principles that teach that if
you can’t repeat something (such as an election) and verify it by independent means, it
doesn’t exist within the realm of what science will accept as established or proven truth."

— Paul Lehto, Attorney at Law, Everett, WA

"Dave Berman has been candid and confrontational in challenging all of us to be "ruthlessly
honest" in answering his question, "What would be better?" He encourages us to
build consensus definitions of "better," and to match our words with actions every day,
even if we do only "the least we can do." Cumulatively and collectively, our actions will
bring truth to light."

— Nezzie Wade, Sociology Professor, Humboldt State University and College of the Redwoods

"Dave Berman's work is quietly brilliant and powerfully utilitarian. His
Voter
Confidence Resolution provides a fine, flexible tool whereby any community can reclaim
and affirm a right relation to its franchise as a community of voters."

— Elizabeth Ferrari, San Francisco, Green Party of California

"This is an important collection of essays with a strong unitary theme: if you can't prove
that you were elected, we can't take you seriously as elected officials. Simple, logical,
comprehensive. 'Management' (aka, the 'powers that be') needs to get the message. 'The
machines' are not legitimizers, they're an artful dodge and a path to deception. We've had
enough...and we most certainly DO NOT consent."

"What's special about this book (and it fits because there's nothing more fundamental
to Democracy than our vote) is the raising of consciousness. Someone recognizing they
have no basis for trusting elections may well ask what else is being taken for granted."

— Eddie Ajamian, Los Angeles, CA

"I urge everyone to read "We Do Not Consent", and distribute it as widely as possible."